tv The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Comedy Central November 7, 2011 6:00pm-6:30pm PST
hink that you're going to dave & buster's, do you? what? >> november 1, 2011. from comedy central's world news headquarters in new york, this is "the daily show" with jon stewart. (cheers and applause) captioning sponsored by comedy central >> jon: welcome to "the daily show," my name is jon stewart! we got one for you tonight. i'm not even going to give it away. we have a special guest tonight, i'm not going to give it away. we'll... i'll give you a small clue. her first name is continue lee saa. other than that it could be anybody. condoleezza. our main story tonight, america's ongoing economic woes. >> as our nation's financial difficulties continue to be defined, as a struggle between those businesses whose
monumental losses were covered by tarp and those whose ramen noodles and hackky sacks were also covered by tarp. but through it all, it's easy to forget the real victims of this epic battles-- the feelings of the winners. >> since when in this country was it okay to demonize success? >> the free enterprise system is under attack. >> the democratic party is going to have to stop bashing the rich. >> demonizing success. >> going after the rich and stokeing the rich back to the old populous. >> why vilify the top 1%? they're not going to save anybody by vilifying them. >> jon: you people don't get it. what part of mo money mo problems don't you understand? (laughter) there is that feeling, too. >> an op-ed columnist in from the "new york times" received these photos snapped at a halloween party last year. they were actual employees at the stephen j. balm law firm
near buffalo, new york. it's a law firm that represents banks when they want to foreclose on someone's home. as you can see, the workers are dressed up as homeless people. and squatters. >> dot dot dot, dot dot dot. breaking news, dot dot dot. some foreclosure lawyers are giant dicks. dot, dot, dot. dot, dot, dot. (cheers and applause) for more on what's going on inside the minds of the 1% we turn to john hodgman and his new segment "money talks." >> japanese yen, what is this the '80 where's? please sir, can i have so more... money? bow before your god! >> money talks. >> jon: welcome back, john, nice to see you. >> thank you very much. >> jon: you've changed the name of your segment to "money talks." >> yes.
>> jon: why is that? >> well, jon, you see, the wealthy are under attack in this country. and so tonight i, john k. hodgman, millionaire, will stand for them. >> jon: i see, so you consider the wealthy a persecuted minority. >> oh, of course. we're only 1%. (laughter) we're completely outnumbered. even your people, the jews, what is it, 2%? 3%? how many of there are you? >> jon: we... we get nervous when people start counting, actually. (laughter) >> well, you seem to be everywhere. hating the wealthy, though, is the last acceptable prejudice in this country. >> jon: that's rick did louk! what? >> jon: i don't agree with that in my way, shape of form. >> give me another one. because the reg disas i hold has not been socially acceptable for many years. a lot of tongue biting in my compound. luckily i have a great mexican fellow who bite mistongue for me. >> jon: let me stop you there,
john. who is attacking the wealthy? >> well, you know, the class warriors, people who think they can win the game by demonizing whole groups of americans. >> jon: who's doing that? >> the moochers. the parasites. the liberals. the old people. children. teachers. nurses. firemen. the underclass. the non-producers. >> jon: see, john, right there. >> what? >> jon: when the one percenters... >> we prefer the term "moneyed americans." (laughter) >> jon: it's okay for you to call other americans moochers or the entitlement class... >> yes, that's correct. (laughter) >> jon: but when individuals suggest that the game may be rigged... >> rigd? outrageous! when someone reaches my level of achievement, everyone shares in my success. >> jon: but not each shares in the money. >> no, no, no, that's mine. that's my money. (laughter) i made it all myself with nobody's help. >> jon: not possible. that's not possible.
>> well, you haven't heard my inspiring story. boys? ♪ >> jon: who are they? >> they're the famous yale whiffenpoofs. >> jon: why did do they whiff you? >> consider them the rich man's chorus. john hodgman came from nothing to be one of the richest, most powerful men on television. ♪ he came from nothing... >> jon: you were raised in an affluent suburb. >> i came from nowhere, john. ♪ he came from nowhere... >> jon: you went to yale. >> yes, i did, but i got in despite the fact that only one of my parents had previously attended yale. ♪ not a legacy... >> the sad fact is my father went to boston college. (laughter) >> jon: they're not going to sing the... >> no, they refuse to sing those words, jon.
(laughter) that's a jesuit school. any way, against all odds, john hodgman sits before you a self-made millionaire television star. ♪ he has his own computer apps >> they helped a little bit. ♪ whatever happened to those >> that's enough, human microphone! >> jon: john, the wealthy are only being asked to allow their top tax crates to increase by 4.5 percentage points. >> unacceptable! why should i be punished because other people are simply too lazy to accidentally become television stars like he? besides, i get back all the time. i pay school taxes. i'm assessed for street repairs. $115 for hotels? who else holds the beauty pageants? who else takes strangers' babies and walks them around the board walk. >> jon: no one is suggesting... (laughter)
... that you're helping the monopoly game isn't appreciated but it's draconian. the last 40 years have seen a change in wealth and equality. i think people would like to see it come more in line with the way that... >> oh, now you've done it, jon. now you've hurt my feelings. and i've got to tell you something. i'm not alone. >> job creators are essentially on strike. >> if barack obama begins taxing me more than 60%-- which is very possible-- i don't know how much longer i'm going to do this. >> if you raise my taxes maybe i'll just decide to sell my business and fire 150 people. >> jon: but that's... that is incredibly childish. >> well, there you go again, demonizing the rich. you force mid-hand, jon. whiffenpoofs, your jox are uncreated. you're fired. ♪ we have to find a job... >> you should have thought of that before you went to yale and majored in a cappella.
get out. (audience reacts) >> jon: i don't understand the thought behind this. so the idea is if you feel insulted and unappreciated you'll just quit even though you're doing well. >> of course. it's the principle here. instead of being vilified, we millionaires and billionaires should be celebrated for the inspiration we provide. we embody the american dream that if you work hard and make sacrifices all people can be part of the 1%. (laughter) >> jon: you know that is mathematically impossible. >> or maybe you're just not working hard enough. >> jon: it is mathematically impossible for 100% of people to be part of the top 1%. >> jon, jon, shh. (laughter) bite your tongue on that one. oh, i could have my man jorge bite your tongue. he's very gentle. >> jon: thank you very much, john. john hodgman, everybody. by the way, his new book "that is all" is available today, coincidentally. (laughter)
nice to see you again. >> nice to see you. >> oh, this is the one we've been waiting for! (laughter) "no higher honor." i just want to turn it this way. oh, yeah. (laughter) you're not messing around. you know what you can actually do is hollow that out and keep another book inside there. (laughter) >> jon: let's start... you know what we deal? here's what we'll do. we'll start in present day and work our way back to the point where you and i started. (laughter) so moammar qaddafi is killed. were you aware that he had a strange and, shall i say, creepy fixation on secretary of state condoleezza rice? did you know that? >> i was aware. several of my foreign minister colleagues had told me before i went to visit him back in 2008 that he had this fixation and when i got there i thought "just get through your business. st do diplomacy, just get out
of here." and everything was going fine and then all of a sudden he said "i have this video for you." (laughter) and i thought uh-oh, what is this? but it was actually just pictures of me with hu jintao, with vladimir putin of russia said to a song he had had written called "black flower in the white house." (laughter and applause) (laughter) >> jon: how's the song go? >> it's kind of hard to sing. >> jon: i would imagine. did he... what does a guy like him do... like, how does he dress to impress? because normally he's throughout looking like a cross between, you know, tyne daly and michael jackson. >> well, he was in the big white robe, big red africa pin.
black hat. i think it was his finest. (laughter) but the most important thing is i was there because he'd given up his weapons of mass destruction and, i'll tell you, when he was in that bunker as the revolution was unfolding all around them i was glad he had given up those dangerous weapons i have no doubt he would have used them. >> jon: they said that he still had chemical weapons. >> he still had some chemical stocks, old chemical stocks but the really dangerous stuff, for instance, some of the weapons that he'd gotten through the a.q. khan network, the pakistani nuclear scientist, those had all been dismantled in oak ridge, tennessee, of all places. >> jon: really. >> yes, right. >> jon: when you watch the events in egypt and tunisia and libya and all that do you look at that as a direct result of some of the other actions that your administration took that
others were more critical of-- say me-- (laughter) do you see that as if one follows naturally from the other... >> i do see it as a changing middle east and i really do believe that we got on the right side of this issue about the freedom agenda. i remember how the realists sort of rushed to the barricades to say, well, no, the middle east is different, you want stability. and, of course, it turns out what's unstable is authoritarianism. so we tried to get ahead of it. i remember going to see mubarak saying to him mr. president reform before your people are in the streets and had he reformed before those people in the streets we'd have a lot easier time of it now in the middle east because once people are reacting out of anger and desperation it gets a lot more chaotic. >> now is it... in some ways the way that the united states has now intervened in libya, does that maybe vindicate... in other words, a strategy that people wanted to use for terrorism and
for these types of things that was smaller bore? you know, special forces, intelligence, using that. at the time the bush administration... i don't want to say ridiculed it but certainly spoke that down as not understanding. >> well, every circumstance is different and in afghanistan we actually went in, if you remember, with a very light footprint, largely american special forces, air power, men on horse back who were the afghan fighters. iraq was a very different of circumstances and i know we'll talk about that. >> jon: yes. >> yes, i figured we might. >> jon: (whit whispering) but just between us. >> i gave you the opening there. but the fact is moammar qaddafi was a monster to his people and supported terrorism, was trying to build weapons but nothing like saddam hussein. i don't think that there's any chance that an arab spring flourishs in iraq. an arab spring in iraq looks like syria but much, much worse
because, unlike qaddafi, saddam hussein had massive army, saddam hussein had 400,000 people in mass graves, he used chemical weapons before. so i think a very different set of circumstances. >> jon: you're saying each individual has to be... >> you do. you can have the same principle: every man, woman and child ought to live in freedom. but you have to recognize that you may have to use different tools to get there. >> jon: that's an excellent point. that's the one we'll... we'll take a commercial and talk about why certain tools were used here and other tools may be untooled. (laughter) we'll be right back with more
(cheers and applause) >> jon: welcome back. we are here talking to former secretary of state condoleezza rice. now, my theory about iraq was that president bush invaded it because he doesn't like words that end with "q." he feels it's an outrageous abdication of semantics and spelling. (laughter) if you were to shine a spotlight and make a case for iran as a terrorist-supporting state and working on weapons of mass destruction and even saudi arabia to some extent, couldn't you have justified invading a whole host of variety of countries in that area? >> well, let me set iran aside because iran is a special case unto itself. but remember that saddam hussein
dragged us into the war by invading kuwait. we then expelled him. for ten years he violated the terms of the agreements that he signed to end the war, including in 1998 president clinton actually lodged cruise missiles at iraq because we couldn't get satisfaction about what was going on with his ppld. the inspectors never then go back into the country. he had, in fact, been such a bad threat that the united states congress passed something called the iraqi liberation act in 199 that said basically that part of the world would never be safe until saddam hussein was gone. so this was not a figment of somebody's imagination in 2003. we had tried when we first came in to strengthen the containment regime around saddam hussein. i remember a sunday afternoon, long sunday afternoon meeting in which we were trying to figure could we have something to do smart sanctions that would hurt the regime and not the people? we had these no-fly zones where
our aircraft would fly to keep his aircraft on the ground. he would shot at them. i remember the president saying "what are we going to do if he shoots down an american pilot?" and, of course, he put 400,000 people in mass graves and weapons of mass destruction were not a theoretical issue with him, he'd used chemical weapons against his own people and against the iranians. so he was a threat. what changed after 2003 is that after you've gone through something like 9/11 we don't want to let threats sit there and materialize and he had been one of the biggest threats on the list for a long time. we tried to deal with it differently before 9/11 and then afterwards put him on notice through the u.n., resolution 1441 passed unanimously that he was a threat to international peace and security, he had to come clean or he would face serious consequences. so that's the sequence one needs to understand. >> it is understandable. i think it's hard to look at it
and not see other dictators of equal threats that also are in the region and also have that north korea, iran, those things. but more importantly it seemed to me that there was a certainty about the weapons of mass destruction and that really was the focus of... you know, everybody always asks for you know what you knew now, would you still have gone in? and people always say "oh, absolutely, i'm glad he's gone." my question would be if you know what we know now about the weapons of mass destruction do you think the american people would have allowed us to go to war? because i think that is the essence of the question. i think the complaint people have is they felt the administration was very efficient at selling us on the idea of the danger that he presented with very specific thoughts of weapons of mass destruction that turned out to be not the case.
>> the reason i give you that is that saddam hussein was a full-blown threat to the international system well before we came to office. as i said, necessitating military force against him before. and the truth of the matter is what you know today can affect you you do tomorrow but not what you did yesterday. now the fact is the intelligence reporting said he has reconstitutes his biological and chemical weapons. that was a unanimous view of the intelligence community. if he's left to his own devices, he will reconstitute his nuclear program in either a year if he gets foreign help or by the end of the decade. now you know his history. he's tried to assassinate george h.w. bush, he's taken us to war, used weapons of mass destruction. you don't want to let that threat sit there. >> jon: well, i really appreciate your coming by and i do feel like i have a better sense of why we did make that huge mistake. (laughter and applause)
"no higher honor" is on the bookshelves now. condoleezza rice. you probably notice probably that interview got cut off there because it's real long. so we put the rest of it up on the web and don't worry it gets more interesting and then less interesting again and then... (laughter) sort of weirdly romantic and then kind of tense again and then there's an arm wrestling and then... then we both sleep and (laughter) then there's an omelet bar and then... ♪
like so many great pioneers before me, guided only by a dream. i'm embarking on a journey of epic proportion. i will travel, from sea to shining sea, through amber waves of grain, and i won't stop until i've helped every driver in america save hundreds on car insurance. well i'm out of the parking lot. that's a good start. geico, fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent, or more on car insurance.
(cheers and applause) >> jon: that's our show. join us tomorrow night at 11:00. tom brokaw will be here. sad news, we lost a great one today. gill cates who was the producer that we worked with on the oscars for both times. just an absolutely in layman's terms a mench and couldn't have had a better time working with him. you know you were in show business when you sat in gill cates' office and you just sat there and ate jelly beans and let him tell you stories about carey grant and nicholson and all the greats he'd worked with and it was a pleasure. we're going to miss him a lot. here it is, your moment of zen. >> there's very few left on television, this is the biggest one. so i'm excited.